The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Should the death penalty be abolished?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
tenyearsoflight has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/20/2017 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 604 times Debate No: 106027
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)



The death penalty should not be abolished. Studies say it deters crime, and it provides justice to murder victims family members.


We should not abolish the death penalty, because no credible studies suggest it deters crime. Even if it does deter crime, there are other considerations which are relevant -- namely, the power of the state. The state should not have the power to kill people.

It turns out that all the evidence that the death penalty deters crime is not evidence at all. Comprehensive international surveys prove that there is absolutely no link between deterring crime and the death penalty.

Therefore, the death penalty should be abolished.
Debate Round No. 1


The death penalty should not be abolished. In your last argument you mentioned that the death penalty does not deter crime. Well one, I believe that the death penalty deters crime in pre-meditated murder because as murders are planning it, the death penalty forces criminals to think twice about their actions. And even if it didn't deter crime, deterrent is not the only reason we have the death penalty. We have it to provide justice to those who have had their family members murdered. These families cannot live with peace knowing that the killer is still alive. Having the death penalty gives families that sense of closure that they need.
Another reason we have the death penalty is to prevent killers from escaping prison and murdering again. It is shown that close to 5500 prisoners have escaped prison and murdered again. By having the death penalty, you take a criminals chance to murder again.
The other argument you addressed about the state having too much power in being able to kill people. How is it too much power? The US military kills people in battle. Police have to kill criminals to protect people. This is the same with the death penalty. The death penalty is not too much power. It is protection. The government has to protect the citizens of the US by putting them to death. By putting these criminals to death, it eliminates any chance for the murder to escape and murder again.
So if there are no other valid arguments that support abolishing the death penalty, then the death penalty has no reason to be abolished.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by WhiteHawk 3 years ago
If a criminal isn't going to change his/her act, I'd rather put them to death than waste tax dollars on their sorry arse.
Posted by kasmic 3 years ago
I wonder if there has ever been a person who in a fit of rage about to kill someone is thinking rationally enough to weigh consequences. I would speculate not.
Posted by kasmic 3 years ago
What studies? What do you mean by justice?
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.